List B2match session attendees

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavior: results are paginated by an opaque cursor and the payload is attendee records only. It does not mention auth/permission requirements or rate limits, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then the sibling routing, then the addressing requirement. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only paginated list tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. With no output schema, a hint about what an attendee record contains (fields available) would have closed the last gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including the 'path is an alternative to session_id' relationship, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description's restatement of that either/or adds little beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Page through the attendees of one agenda session') and immediately bounds scope by saying it does not return session details, routing to get_session instead. An agent can distinguish this from get_session, get_agenda and list_participants without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit routing ('use get_session for those') and prerequisite sourcing for the two addressing parameters ('session_id or path (from get_agenda)'). It stops short of naming the event-wide alternative (list_participants) or any exclusion conditions such as access prerequisites, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.